clr/1987/1987_3_1812.pdf

(1987)1986July5 (TR1ANTAFYLLIDESΡ] INTHE MATTER OFARTICLE146 OFTHECONSTITUTION ANDREAS MAOURI, Applicant, THEREPUBLICOFCYPRUS, THROUGH 1 THE MINISTEROFFINANCE, 2. THECOMMISSIONEROFINCOME TAX, Respondents (CaseNo 531/82) Taxation — Income Tax / Special Contnbution — Assessments raised by Commissioner of Income Tax—Judicialcontrol— 77iisCourt isnotentitled todisturbthesubjudice decision, ifsuchdecision wasreasonablyopen tothe Commissioner of Income Tax The facts sufficiently appear in the judgment of the Court 5 Recourse dismissed No order as tocosts Cases referred to Georghiadesv The Republic

(1982)3 CLR 659, Stavnmdes ν TheRepublic

(1985)3CLR 2766, 10 Ehadesv TheRepublic [1985) 3C LR 1904 Recourse. RVcourse againsttheincometax assessmentraisedanapplicant forthe yearsof assessment1977-1979andinrespectof the special contributionsforthepenod 1.1.1975- 31 3.

1. 15 A Kara-j, forthe applicant. M.Fhotiou, forthe respondent. Cur adv.vult. 1812 3 C.L.R. Naouri v. Republic TRiANTAFYLLIDESP.read thefollowingjudgment. Bymeans of the present recourse the applicant is challenging assessments raised bythe respondent Commissioner of IncomeTaxin respect of income tax for the years of assessment 1977-1979 and in 5 respect ofspecialcontribution for theperiod from 1 January 1975 to31 March
2. The applicant derives hisincome from farming. As he had outstanding objections to the aforementioned assessments he was called to the Income Tax Office, on 19 10 November
3. where he gave a statement regarding his assets and liabilitiesandonthebasisofsuchstatement,andtogetherwith other information, the taxliability of the applicant was examined; and since no agreement was reached between the applicant and the Commissioner of Income Tax the latter determined the 15 objections and communicated tothe applicant hisdecision on 15 December
4. Against such decision the applicant filed recourse No. 83/81, which was withdrawn on 15 February 1982, due to the fact that certain information about the assets of the applicant came to the 20 knowledge of the Commissioner of Income Tax, after the determination of the objections, and he agreed to reconsider his decision inthe matter. There followed discussions between the applicant and his lawyerandtheCommissionerofIncomeTax,butasno agreement 25 was reached the Commissioner decided to abide by the assessments already raised and communicated hisdecision tothe applicant on 30 September 1982, together with the relevant notices of taxpayable. Insupport of thepresent recourse counsel forthe applicant has 30 submitted that theCommissioner of Income Taxhasacted under a misconception regardingfactswhich mightaffect the applicant's tax liability, in that he had failed to take into account that the applicant isadisplaced person, thathehaslosthispropertydue to the Turkish invasion and that he has sustained losses because of 35 damage to cropswhich he cultivated. It has been, also, argued that the sub judice decision was reached in contravention of the rightssafeguarued by Articles 6, 24 and 28 of the Constitution. Fromthe material placed before thisCourt I have come tothe 40 conclusion that the applicant has failed to substantiate in a 1813 Triantafyllldes P. M a o u r i v. Republic

(1987)satisfactory manner hisclaimsregarding losseswhichheallegedly has sustained and that he has. also, failed to furnish the Commissioner of Income Tax with certificates, documents and otherparticularssupportinghisobjections againsttheassessments inquestion. On the basis, therefore, of the material before him it was reasonably open to the Commissioner of Income Tax to raise the assessmentsconcernedinthewaycomplainedofbytheapplicant. andthisCourt is,consequently, notentitled todisturb hisrelevant decision (see,inthisrespect,Georghiadesv. TheRepublic.

(1982)10 3 C.L.R. 659, 669, Stavrinides v. The Republic.

(1985)3 C.L.R. 2766, 2770 and Eiiades v. The Republic.

(1985)3 C.L.R. 1904. 1910). Regarding,next,thecontentionofcounselfortheapplicant that the assessments contravene Articles 6, 24 and 28 of the 15 Constitution Iamof theview that ithasnotbeen established,ina way justifying the intervention of this Court, that either the assessments in question are excessive and not according to the applicant's means or that he was treated in a discriminatory manner ascompared to other citizensof the Republic. 20 Inthe result thisrecourse failsandisdismissedaccordingly; but with no order asto itscosts. Recoursedismissed. No order astocosts. 1814 5